ArticleInternational journal of cardiology2019
Combining morphological and biomechanical factors for optimal carotid plaque progression prediction: An MRI-based follow-up study using 3D thin-layer models.
Article in International journal of cardiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Deep learning-based automatic segmentation of arterial vessel walls and plaques in MR vessel wall images for quantitative assessment.European radiology · 2025Article
- Comparison and identification of human coronary plaques with/without erosion using patient-specific optical coherence tomography-based fluid-structure interaction models: a pilot study.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- Novel imaging modalities for the identification of vulnerable plaques.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Impact of residual stress on coronary plaque stress/strain calculations using optical coherence tomography image-based multi-layer models.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Combining IVUS + OCT Data, Biomechanical Models and Machine Learning Method for Accurate Coronary Plaque Morphology Quantification and Cap Thickness and Stress/Strain Index Predictions.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
- Comparison of multilayer and single-layer coronary plaque models on stress/strain calculations based on optical coherence tomography images.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- Human Coronary Plaque Optical Coherence Tomography Image Repairing, Multilayer Segmentation and Impact on Plaque Stress/Strain Calculations.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022Article
- Predicting Coronary Stenosis Progression Using Plaque Fatigue From IVUS-Based Thin-Slice Models: A Machine Learning Random Forest Approach.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- The Differentiation in Image Post-processing and 3D Reconstruction During Evaluation of Carotid Plaques From MR and CT Data Sources.Frontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Using Optical Coherence Tomography and Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging to Quantify Coronary Plaque Cap Stress/Strain and Progression: A Follow-Up Study Using 3D Thin-Layer Models.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Plaque progression prediction is of fundamental significance to cardiovascular research and disease diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. Magnetic resonance image (MRI) data of carotid atherosclerotic plaques were acquired from 20 patients with consent obtained. 3D thin-layer models were constructed to calculate plaque stress and strain. Data for ten morphological and biomechanical risk factors were extracted for analysis. Wall thickness increase (WTI), plaque burden increase (PBI) and plaque area increase (PAI) were chosen as three measures for plaque progression. Generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) with 5-fold cross-validation strategy were used to calculate prediction accuracy and identify optimal predictor. The optimal predictor for PBI was the combination of lumen area (LA), plaque area (PA), lipid percent (LP), wall thickness (WT), maximum plaque wall stress (MPWS) and maximum plaque wall strain (MPWSn) with prediction accuracy = 1.4146 (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) value is 0.7158), while PA, plaque burden (PB), WT, LP, minimum cap thickness, MPWS and MPWSn was the best for WTI (accuracy = 1.3140, AUC = 0.6552), and a combination of PA, PB, WT, MPWS, MPWSn and average plaque wall strain (APWSn) was the best for PAI with prediction accuracy = 1.3025 (AUC = 0.6657). The combinational predictors improved prediction accuracy by 9.95%, 4.01% and 1.96% over the best single predictors for PAI, PBI and WTI (AUC values improved by 9.78%, 9.45%, and 2.14%), respectively. This suggests that combining both morphological and biomechanical risk factors could lead to better patient screening strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.